2011 (3) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....TED BY : Ms. Deepali Kamble, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.S. Katiyar SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President (Oral)]. - Heard the Ld. Advocate for the appellants and the Ld. DR for the respondents. 2. Apart from what is stated in the application, the Ld. Advocate submitted that the earlier application which was dismissed was ROM applicat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appeal No. E/604 of 2002 that was dismissed, but what was dismissed under order dated 11-1-2010 was the application which was filed by the appellants for rectification of the alleged mistake in the order dated 25-9-2008. 5. It is apparent that the order dated 11-1-2010 came to be passed dismissing the said application essentially on account of failure on the part of the appellants to p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is ground good, the Advocate for the appellants has placed reliance in the order passed in the matter of Kellogg India Ltd. case. 8. There cannot be any doubt that the application for review is to be heard by the Bench who had heard the matter earlier. This Rule however, is not without exception. In a case where a member or the members, who had heard the matter originally, is are not avail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reason the matter would not be heard by the Bench. In case the litigant wants to raise any objection on the ground that the matter should not be heard by a particular Bench for any reason, the litigant has to appear before the Tribunal and point out the same to the Tribunal. There is no justification for absence of the applicant on the relevant day. The ground disclosed in the application can neve....